test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
where are all the people who said it would never happen?
dondoodles
Member Posts: 31 Arc User
man i swear there used to be a lot of people who said that a t6 end game connie would never happen. then when the kelvin connie happened, they started saying yeah but a TOS end game connie will never happen. and now its happened. so where are all those people? we need a roll call lololol
0
Comments
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
And then, y'know... things changed in the future.
But sure, let's go ahead and go with "LOLOLOL THEY SAID IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN LOLOLOLOLOL GOTCHA"
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
Like my fanpage!
https://www.facebook.com/CaptainBMoney913
Join Date: August 29th 2010
Whatever was causing a Connie not to be in game as endgame ship seemed to have been no longer the case. Most likely it was a contractual obligation between CBS, Paramount and Cryptic for marketing purposes.
But I honestly did not expect they'd put in a lockbox or a promo pack. I was kinda expecting an Anniversary/Winter/Summer Event style project. Ah, well, there is still the Tier 6 Constitution Refit as alternative...
If only you hadn't gone and gotten your main account banned.
Yep, feasting on crow, they are.
Being critical doesn't take skill. Being constructively critical- which is providing alternative solutions or suggestions to a demonstrated problem, however, does.
We didn't get a written document detailing the restrictions, but we did get posts by the people more or less in charge of Star Trek Online at the time. I believe it was dstahl, actually, that first mentioned CBS' involvement in this, and explaining it wasn't just an arbitrary Cryptic decision because they hate money. And dstahl was not the kind of person to underpromise and overdeliver.
Can you still find those quotes after website revamps, forum revamps, changes in company ownership? Nope.
But the F.C.T. thread wasn't just a crazy scheme made up by some random overzealous moderator.
But is it still relevant? No, obviously not. Things change. People that said they would never change very obviously mistaken. Pepole that said it wasn't available at endgame for "immersion" or "believability" reasons were obviously wrong, but we already knew that when the first lockbox ships and Tier 5 Retrofits hit the game.
But guess what influence all the posts on these boards had about an endgame Connie?
That it got into the game at all? No, the key thing here was that something changed on the contractual side, for whatever reason, and whatever specifically.
That it got in the game via special lockbox and promo events. Maybe. They certainly new they had something at their hands that would sell.
I just felt a disturbance in the Farce.
T6 vesta is coming... in a lock box.
"Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.
Support the "Armored Unicorn" vehicle initiative today!
Thanks for Harajuku. Now let's get a real "Magical Girl" costume!
I think they're still too busy licking their wounds over KT Timeline butthurt to even begin to deal with this blow.
the vast majority of people said "CBS won't allow it, don't hold your breath".
and we went through with this when the KT connie was released.
Except for the fact that numerous developers of STO have said in countless interviews over the years that CBS was against the idea of a higher tier TOS Constitution, because the ship should be rare at this point in the timeline. Is that not credible enough for you?
I was one of those that said it most likely wouldn't happen, because the developers said so, because CBS said so, and that that wasn't likely to change, but that they'll continue to ask for it. Obviously, the rarity problem was sorted by doing it in the R&D packs.
I have no regrets over repeating the information that was given to us from credible sources, so there's no real "gotcha" situation here for you to feel smug or superior over, instead you just look foolish and ill-informed.
You mean back into the game?
[Insert Eduard Khil video here]
We're all still waiting on those "official" cited references... got any handy?
Being critical doesn't take skill. Being constructively critical- which is providing alternative solutions or suggestions to a demonstrated problem, however, does.
Stahl's quote, and every other comment that came after (even Geko's) always had the caveat that the decision wasn't final. The FCT thread however, incorrectly claimed that the decision was final. Which means ...
I feel it was overzealous, because the FCT thread was used to shut down a topic that still was relevant and was always relevant.
http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/1020330-ask-cryptic_-november-2012
6 years of being told you were wrong when you were right the whole time does tend to prompt people to have a reaction. We can always put this to a test. Let's you and me come up with a topic or an idea of yours. And then we'll get an entire internet forum to post about it from now until 2022, telling you and all who take your idea to heart, that they are wrong. Then in 2022, we'll reveal that the idea was actually right. See if anyone feels like saying "I told you so" at that point.
I sincerely thank you - this is the first time I've seen someone actually post a credible source for any hint of an answer in this topic.
Copy pasting the relevant response here- "CBS is still pretty adamant about the Old Connie not being an end game ship, but you never know what can happen as time rolls by."
Pretty adamant =/= "NO". And the words closing the sentence clarify the meaning.
Nuff said.
Being critical doesn't take skill. Being constructively critical- which is providing alternative solutions or suggestions to a demonstrated problem, however, does.
Wait, were you also one of those posters who said that it shouldn't be in the game because it's too old?
It would break immersion?
It's too small to really pack the required punch for end-game combat?
Did you point out that an excelsior went toe to toe with a Defiant, so had evolved over the century, but that the Connie couldn't because it's dimensions were too restrictiing?
Did you dissect every battle scene in DS9 using an Excelsior?
Did you claim the Connie had been retired by 2409?
Did you suggest that it wouldn't look right having that ship in an STF against the Borg?
Just want to delve into the depths of where you were in this debate so I don't look foolish being smug about the ship being put into the game finally.
CBS (or was it Paramount? Or was it Cryptic? Or was it Statesman?) said no!
Until 2016, when for some weird reason they decided that it wasn't too old, and finally said yes!
You'd really have to be a complete moron to not recognize the retro-throwback motif artwork which is targeted toward those who relishes the "old" style.
Being critical doesn't take skill. Being constructively critical- which is providing alternative solutions or suggestions to a demonstrated problem, however, does.
The "too old" argument worked until the release of the AoY content. The 23rd Century C-Store ships almost guaranteed that a Tier 6 TOS Constitution was coming and soon. Although, it could be said that the 23rd Century C-Store ships aren't from the 23rd Century, but 31st Century ships designed to look like they are from the 23rd Century. After all, we are not getting a Tier 6 23rd Century Light Cruiser, but a Temporal Light Cruiser with futuristic Molecular Reconstruction technology that looks like it came from the 23rd Century. So is it a Tier 6 TOS Constitution if it only looks like a TOS Constitution on the outside and full of 31st Century technology on the inside?